Re: [HACKERS] Features list

From: Marc Howard Zuckman <marc(at)fallon(dot)classyad(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Features list
Date: 1998-10-24 23:34:26
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.02A.9810241930380.16433-100000@fallon.classyad.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 24 Oct 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote, in part:

> CHANGES IN THE 6.4 RELEASE
> --------------------------
>
> Bug Fixes
> ---------
>
> Enhancements
> ------------
> Enable HAVING clause but no fixes elsewhere yet.
> Add HAVING clause with full support for subselects and unions(Stephan)

These two comments raise a question as to whether the having clause
is fully functional. Is it thought to be fully implemented and bug
free?

Marc Zuckman

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-10-24 23:46:16 Re: [HACKERS] Features list
Previous Message Tom Lane 1998-10-24 20:32:54 pg_upgrade bug report